Next Small War

[Martin]

Sir, DDilegge, France has for some time recognized that they are threatened, regardless of their stance on Iraq. I remember that even at Strasbourg airport they had FAMAS carrying MPs patrolling. They have also made public announcements to this effect.

What I find curious is that there's an ambiguity in deciding who the enemy is. I think the naming of the war (GWOT) is a reflection of an inability to define the threat. So instead of saying something as politically incorrect and bottomless as that it's a war against evil (NK is not Islamic), we say terrorism.

I think we’re not having an official discussion about whether or not we’re at war with Islam partly out of political correctness (yuck) and out of fear that the power of defining this war will move from the US government to those who can scream the loudest. Reciprocally the Islamic extremists would find themselves with more scared recruits and we would have to broaden our definitions on just who it is we’re fighting, until it comes full circle.

We are today far from united in how to combat this threat – an outwardly focus that seems diluted from the fact that people put it into so many different contexts, whether each and everyone are correct is not “clear”. What if we’d have to ask who it is who bears responsibility for what?

So we say that they hate our way of life, and sure they do, and the Europeans in their (ahem, our… as I am regrettably European) delusional vision of moral and intellectual grandeur laughs at such a simplistic explanation. I think people need and deserve a better context to put it in than that, and unless it is explained well, they will create or search for that context elsewhere.

The west may not be at war with Islam, but in failing to understand the people behind the headline of “terrorist threat”, even those who are content to passively give the nod, of course it is unlikely France will identify them. Of course you must be crazy and extreme and dumb if you’re not shouting Vive La Republic at the Champs Elysees. Or maybe their politicians simply don’t understand the orientation of their people, much less the disenfranchised who come from yet more different backgrounds, with much different experiences. Cloudy vision, diluted focus, half-strength blows. EU constitution anyone?

Yes, I do think this is alluding to the future. But I don't think the agitators understand what will happen when the people redefine the threat picture themselves, including as allies criminal organizations concerned about their money, and the state with its military forces.
What China would do in such a case could be interesting to ponder...

I hope that made sense, and please correct me and tell me if I should rather be quiet. I really don't want to step where I shouldn't, and this is about as far as I go.

Martin